1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and each of the designated parties listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “Plaintiffs (Appointed Party”) provided labor to Btel Emergency Countermeasures Management Committee (Representative C), but did not receive wages.

B. On August 1, 2017, the Plaintiff (Appointed) et al. issued a written confirmation of overdue wages, etc. with the following details from the Seoul Southern Vice-Governor of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency.

D. From June 10, 2015 to June 10, 2015, work period A, including the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) to December 3, 2015, D. 4,846,560 won to June 10, 2015 to December 3, 10, 2015; from June 10 to December 3, 2015, to December 3, 3, 2015; from June 3, 2015 to December 34, 357,320 won to June 3, 2015; from June 10 to 31, 2015 to October 31, 305; from June 31, 2015 to October 31, 2015 to June 31, 2015; from June 31, 2015 to June 4, 2015 to August 4, 2015;

C. On April 4, 2018, the Plaintiff (Appointed) et al. and other workers, K, based on the written confirmation of the business operator with respect to overdue wage, etc., filed a lawsuit against Btel emergency countermeasure committee seeking payment of overdue wage, and was sentenced to a full winning judgment (Seoul Southern District Court 2017Gadan248289), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on April 21, 2018.

On April 24, 2018, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and K requested the Defendant to pay a small amount of substitute payment. On July 24, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision on site pay on the ground that “The Committee for Emergency Countermeasures against Btel (the business owner) had operated the business subject to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act pursuant to Article 8(2)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act for at least six months until the date of retirement of the relevant worker, but does not correspond to it (the period of operation of the place of business providing labor is not confirmed).”

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.

The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and K filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on August 7, 2018, against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission (the Central Administrative Appeals Commission) filed an administrative appeal.